Share A teleseismic shear-wave splitting study to investigate mantle flow around South America and implications for plate-driving forces

All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.

Related Documents

Share

Transcript

Geophys. J. Int.
(2002)
149,
F1–F7
FAST TRACK PAPER
A teleseismic shear-wave splitting study to investigate mantle ﬂowaround South America and implications for plate-driving forces
George Helffrich,
1,
* Douglas A. Wiens,
2
Emilio Vera,
3
Sergio Barrientos,
3
Patrick Shore,
2
Stacey Robertson
2
and Rodrigo Adaros
3
1
Earth and Planetary Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology,
2-12-1
Ookayama, Meguro-ku, Tokyo
152-8551,
Japan. E-mail: george@geology.bristol.ac.uk
2
Earth and Space Sciences, Washington University, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, MO, USA
3
Departmento de Geoﬁsica, Universidade de Chile, Santiago, Chile
Accepted 2001 November 4. Received 2001 October 29; in srcinal form 2001 August 8
SUMMARY
ClosureofthePaciﬁcOceanbasinbytheconvergenceofitssurroundingplates,someofwhichhave deep continental roots, implies that there is net mass ﬂux out of the mantle under thePaciﬁc. Here we report on a shear-wave splitting study designed to test the prediction thatthere should be ﬂow around its southern margin. Our results show no evidence for present-dayﬂow around the tip of southern South America. Instead, the results suggest present-day ﬂowdirections in the southern Atlantic that parallel the South American absolute plate motiondirection, even under Antarctica. The results also provide evidence for absolute plate motiondrivenbythebasaldragofoceanbasin-scalemantleﬂow,andsuggestthat
∼
200kmthickﬂow boundary layers exist under South America and Antarctica, and also demonstrate that mantleﬂow directions cannot be reliably inferred from present-day plate morphology.
Key words:
mantle ﬂow, shear-wave splitting.
1 INTRODUCTION
ThemechanismsthatmovethemosaicofplatescoveringtheEarth’ssurface are imperfectly understood. South America’s motion is par-ticularly enigmatic because it lacks signiﬁcant subducting margins(Fig. 1), which draw plates trenchward on account of the negative buoyancy of the subducted plate (Forsyth & Ueyda 1975; Harper 1978; Stoddard & Abbott 1996). One proposed mechanism to movenon-subducting plates is through basal tractions arising from con-vectiveﬂowofthemantle(Stoddard&Abbott1996;Russo&Silver 1996; Silver
et al.
1998). Convective upwelling of the deep mantleassociated with hot spots might also play a role as the ascendingmaterial spreads laterally under the plate, since hot spots seem to be associated with continental breakup and changes in relative platemotion (Wilson 1988; Cox 1989; Silver
et al.
1998). Continentsmay be particularly susceptible to basal forces because they containdeep, seismically visible cratonic roots (Grand 1994; Bokelmann& Silver 2000). Indeed, continental shear-wave splitting patternssuggest organized ﬂow around their roots (Fouch
et al.
2000).One region in which there must be a signiﬁcant lateral compo-nentofmantleconvectionisaroundthemarginofthePaciﬁcOcean.Alvarez (1982) observed that this ocean basin is closing because allits surrounding plates are moving into it. Consequently, the infra-Paciﬁc mantle must be laterally displaced by the roots of the sur-
*Nowat:EarthSciences,U.Bristol,WillsMem.Bldg.,Queen’sRoad,BristolBS8 1RJ, UK.
rounding, advancing continents. The limited egress afforded by thecontinents might channel ﬂow laterally between them. The chan-nelled ﬂow could be responsible for tectonic features such as theDrake Passage and the Caribbean Ocean and the small subductionmargins at their eastern extents. Mantle ﬂow is detectable seismi-callythroughtheanisotropiceffectsuponwavepropagationthroughoriented mantle material (characterized by a fast polarization direc-tion
φ
andadelaytime
δ
t
)thatariseduetolattice-preferredorienta-tion in olivine (Silver & Chan 1991). Russo & Silver’s (1994) used the pattern of shear-wave splitting observations and geoid featuresaround South America to infer that there was lateral ﬂow along itswestern margin and eastward ﬂow into the Caribbean in the northas predicted by Alvarez (1982) (Fig. 1). The physical and chemi-cal features of the seaﬂoor between Australia and Antarctica alsosuggest lateral mantle ﬂow out of the Paciﬁc basin (Alvarez 1990;Christie
etal.
1998).IfRusso&Silver’s(1994)inferencesarevalid,thereshouldbeasimilarﬂowthroughtheDrakePassagearoundthesouthern boundary of South America that is evident in the patternof shear-wave splitting there. In order to test this hypothesis, we de- ployedportableseismicstationsaroundtheDrakePassagetocollectrecords of seismic anisotropy in the form of splitting of teleseismicshear waves.
2 DATA AND METHODS
The network consisted of temporary, portable broad-band seis-mometers and autonomous dataloggers deployed in Patagonia
C

2002 RAS
F1
F2
G. Helffrich
et al.
Figure 1.
Maps showing hypothesized South American mantle ﬂow patterns, and location of seismic stations deployed in the experiment to detect them.Russo & Silver (1994) interpreted the pattern of fast polarization directions on the around South America (lines denote directions and stars the stations used intheir study; squares from Polet
et al.
2000) as indicating mantle ﬂow (arrows) from a stagnation point corresponding to a geoid high (H circle). Flow may beresponsible for west-facing subduction in the Lesser Antilles and the South Sandwich arcs. Inset shows locations of portable seismic stations (SEPA, SeismicExperiment in Patagonia and Antarctica, triangles) deployed around the Drake Passage to detect the southerly ﬂow component. Small circles in both panelsindicate locations of permanent Global Seismic Network (GSN) stations.
and Antarctica (Fig. 1). The temporary stations recorded naturalearthquakes for approximately two years, including S, ScS, SKS,SKKS, PKKS and PKS arrivals used for splitting measurements.We augmented these recordings with additional data from perma-nent stations on Antarctica and South Atlantic islands (Fig. 1). 81different earthquakes provided 168 recordings that were processed (Silver & Chan 1991) and combined (Wolfe & Silver 1998; Restivo& Helffrich 1999) to yield splitting estimates beneath each station(Table 1).Fig. 2 shows an example of a split SKS arrival and the analysismethod used, and Fig. 3 summarizes all the results. As a group, theAntarctic results indicate fast polarization directions oriented NE– SW to ENE–WSW, roughly parallel to the western margin of theAntarctic Peninsula (uncharacterized or poorly characterized sitesare consistent with this trend).
δ
t
ranges from over 2 s down to1 s in the region. In the south Atlantic, fast polarization directions
φ
trend similarly but with slightly lower
δ
t
, between 0.6 and 1.2 s. InPatagonia,
δ
t
is small (zero within uncertainty in all cases) and fast polarization directions lack a consistent orientation. Farther northwhere the Nazca Plate subducts under the Andean Cordillera, thedelay time is 0.75 s and
φ
is easterly. The depth extent of anisotropyis unconstrained, but waveform inversion of surface waves sug-gest 4 per cent polarization anisotropy extending from 40–120 kmdepth in southern South America (Robertson
et al.
pers. comm.2001).
3 RESULTS
Unlike the mantle ﬂow pattern envisaged by Russo & Silver (1994),around northern South America from their splitting results (Fig. 1),
C

2002 RAS,
GJI
,
149,
F1–F7
South American mantle ﬂow
F3
Table1.
Combined splitting results. PRAT and FREI (Base Arturo Prat and Base Presidente Frei,Chilean Antarctic region) processed jointly due to
∼
50 km station separation yielding virtuallyidentical mantle sampling by upgoing
S
waves. APM indicates the South American plate motiondirection in the hotspot reference frame (Gordon 1995), and
φ
-APM the difference between thefast polarization direction and APM.Site Lat. Lon.
φ
±
δ
t
±
APM
φ
-APM(
◦
N) (
◦
E) (
◦
) (s) (
◦
) (
◦
)
Temporary stations
FELL
−
52.088
−
70.008 74. 22.5 0.36 1.26 256.2 2.2HAMB
−
53.617
−
70.934 49. 22.5 0.44 1.02 256.3 27.3MILO
−
51.571
−
72.625 32. 22.5 0.48 1.26 257.3 45.3VTDF
−
54.140
−
68.711
−
83. 22.5 0.45 0.85 255.4
−
21.6SALM
−
52.530
−
71.989 30. 22.5 0.15 0.72 256.9 46.9FREI
+
PRAT
−
62.332
−
59.324 45. 22.5 0.90 0.85 249.4 24.4ELEF
−
61.170
−
55.100 90. 10.0 2.05 0.62 248.1
−
21.9SPPT
−
64.296
−
61.051 67. 22.0 2.75 0.94 249.4 2.4DECP
−
62.977
−
60.670
−
65. 22.5 0.62 1.69 249.7 45.3
Permanent stations
HOPE
−
54.280
−
36.480 49. 22.5 0.60 0.50 244.1 15.1EFI
−
51.480
−
58.410 70. 4.0 1.20 0.20 252.2 2.2PMSA
−
64.770
−
64.050 79. 9.0 1.85 0.50 250.6
−
8.4PLCA
−
40.733
−
70.551 70. 9.0 0.75 0.20 257.9 7.9
Backazimuths for high S/N nulls
OHIG
−
63.317
−
57.900 212.9 223.6 210.3 208.9LOWI
−
63.247
−
62.181 238.5 238.5 235.0
there does not seem to be evidence in our own results for a corre-sponding present-day southern ﬂow. This is because there is neither uniform orientation nor large delay times in our Patagonian results.Delay times are small enough in southern Patagonia to be due tocrustalstructure(Barruol1993).ExceptingPatagonia,thelargerde-lay times in southern South America and the South Atlantic islandssuggest a mantle signal, and trend northeasterly. Some complexityin Patagonian splitting results may arise due to the Nazca–SouthAmerican–Antarctic triple junction changing the subduction geom-etry along the southern South American margin (Murdie & Russo1999), but this same trend is seen north of the triple junction (atPLCA, Fig. 3), suggesting that it is a larger scale pattern. Fig. 3shows a cross-section along western South America, showing theseismicity shallowing to the south. If this indicates the absence of a slab, easterly upper-mantle ﬂow would be expected along witheast-west fast polarization directions, which is not observed. If anaseismic plate does extend here, as suggested by volcanism in west-ern Patagonia (Gill 1981; Simkin
et al.
1981), the splitting signalwouldbeacombinationofthesubplateanisotropy,themantlewedgeanisotropy, and any lithospheric anisotropy. In central South Amer-ica, Polet
et al.
(2000) found
φ
orientations in both the down-dipdirection and trench-parallel directions, and explained them as re-sulting from either slab-normal stresses due to slab rollback, or asdue to lateral along-strike mantle ﬂow channelled by the slab. Inter- pretingresultsfromPLCAandEFIsimilarlywouldrequirerotationsin subducted slab strike
>
45
◦
, eliminating any barrier to ﬂow in thesouth. On this account, there is no seismological evidence for ﬂowin this region nor for a role for Paciﬁc mantle ﬂow in maintainingrollback in the South Sandwich arc. However, because the seismo-logical results only reﬂect essentially present-day mantle structure,theydonotruleoutamantleﬂowrolefortheformationoftheScotiaSea
∼
30 Ma, as suggested by Paciﬁc mantle afﬁnities detected in both Drake Passage basalts and in South Sandwich backarc and arclavas (Livermore
et al.
1997; Pearce
et al.
2001).The Antarctic splitting results are more consistent in their orien-tation and their magnitudes (Fig. 3) but there is no unique expla-nation for their uniformity. We observe margin-parallel orientationscompatible with either fossil lithospheric anisotropy, some scenar-ios of active rifting, or with trench-parallel ﬂow. The former sourceis unlikely because the stations are close to the trench developed by recent subduction along the western Antarctic Peninsula marginandthushavenounderlyingAntarcticlithosphere(Roult&Rouland 1994; Danesi & Morelli 2000), but their fast polarization directions parallel the orogenic axis (Silver 1996; Nicolas 1993). The SouthShetlandIslandspresentlyareriftingawayfromtheAntarcticPenin-sula via backarc spreading in the Bransﬁeld Strait (Cunningham
et al.
1995), so the regional
φ
orientation may carry a rifting signa-ture similar to the rift axis parallel trend seen in the northern RioGrande Rift (Sandvol
et al.
1992). Alternatively, the slab associated with waning subduction on the western Antarctic Peninsula mar-gin may be orienting ﬂow, apparently in a wide region extendingto EFI and HOPE and oblique to the Drake Passage. The large de-lay times (
≥
1.85 s) we observe are difﬁcult to reconcile with this.Local seismicity in the slab is no deeper than 60 km (Robertson
et al.
2000) and subduction was short-lived on this margin, whichwould not create a barrier to ﬂow capable of orienting olivine downto
∼
200 km depth, which the
δ
t
values suggest (Silver & Chan1991).
4 DISCUSSION
If Paciﬁc mantle is discharging into the Atlantic through the DrakePassage, our results show that it is not occurring as envisaged byAlvarez (1982) and Russo & Silver (1994). Surface wave disper-sion around Antarctica and southern South America does not indi-cate that lithospheric barriers exist under either continent border-ing the Drake Passage (Roult & Rouland 1994; Danesi & Morelli2000). There should be no structures impeding upper-mantle ﬂowin this region, yet we ﬁnd no shear-wave splitting evidence for ﬂowchannelled by South America. The simplest model capable of ex- plainingtheuniform
φ
intheAntarctic,S.AtlanticislandandSouthAmericasplittingresults(excludingPatagonia)istoinvokeAtlantic
C

2002 RAS,
GJI
,
149,
F1–F7
F4
G. Helffrich
et al.
Figure 2.
Example of splitting analysis method. Three-component seismogram (
upper left
) is windowed to isolate the shear-wave arrival of interest (in thiscase, SKS). The method seeks the inverse splitting operator (
φ
,
δ
t
) that minimizes the energy on the tangential component in the analysis window without
a priori
assumption of incoming polarization. Original radial and tangential components shown before applying and after applying the operator (
upper right
).The operator shifts the tangential component in time (
δ
t
) to align with the radial component (
middle
). Optimal (
φ
,
δ
t
) values (star) and their uncertainties(extent of double contour) shown on
bottom left
. Combining individual observations yields the overall uncertainty (extent of double line) for a single station,which is (30
±
22
.
5
◦
, 0
.
15
±
0
.
72 s), indistinguishable from zero at the 95 per cent conﬁdence level (
bottom right
). We assume single-layer splitting.
mantle ﬂow due to plume buoyancy ﬂux (Silver
et al.
1998) driveninto the Paciﬁc Basin. Comparing South American absolute platemotion directions (APM) (Gordon 1995) and fast polarization di-rections (Fig. 4 and Table 1), we see that they cluster around the predicted South American APM, even for stations on the Antarctic plate rather than South America (Fig. 1). When comparing
φ
withAntarctic APM for stations on the Antarctic plate, we ﬁnd larger deviations, averaging
−
42
◦
. Our model is sketched in Fig. 4, and invokesshallowlateralAtlanticﬂowundersouthernSouthAmericaaccommodated by Nazca plate rollback, and Atlantic mantle ﬂowunder the Antarctic Peninsula where a deep lithospheric root is ab-sent (Roult & Rouland 1994; Danesi & Morelli 2000). Flow in theDrake Passage must be weak, eastward Paciﬁc mantle ﬂow in order to result in the small Patagonian
δ
t
values we observe and to satisfy
C

2002 RAS,
GJI
,
149,
F1–F7
South American mantle ﬂow
F5
Figure3.
Splitting results and seismicity along western South American margin. Map shows splitting results (
φ
given by bars,
δ
t
by bar length) and seismicity projected along a vertical section (depths shown). Grey bars indicate stations with
δ
t
indistinguishable from zero within measurement uncertainty, and largecrosses the possible fast-polarization directions compatible with null splitting observations from some Antarctic temporary stations. Seismicity shallowssouthwards towards Patagonia, suggesting either no slab (and thus no barrier to ﬂow), or an aseismic slab.
thePbisotopicsignatureinDrakePassageMORB,whichsrcinated in Paciﬁc mantle (Pearce
et al.
2001).Our results indicate that eastward mantle ﬂow out of the southernPaciﬁc Basin is not channelled by western South American slabs or lithospheric roots. The inferred South American APM-parallel ﬂowdirections under Antarctica imply that that a single, ocean-basinscale mantle ﬂow ﬁeld exists in the South Atlantic. This result issomewhat unique in splitting studies, where there is typically anambiguity between the motion of the plate relative to the mantleor vice versa, both of which lead to the same
φ
orientation. Sincethe same South American APM-relative
φ
exists under two plateswith different APM directions, the splitting signal must be due tothe mantle ﬂow ﬁeld itself. The ﬂow extends under Antarctica and probably drives the westward motion of South America by basaldrag on the plate, a result compatible with a quantitative balancingof South American plate torques (Meijer & Wortel 1992). We sus- pect that the reason Antarctica is not moving in a similar directionis because it is surrounded by ridges that constrain its lateral motion(Silver
et al.
1998), while South America’s subduction margin, incontrast, allows westward movement. We may estimate the thick-ness of the anisotropic part of the ﬂowing layer from the averageAntarctic delay times,
∼
1.9 s, which suggests a
∼
200 km thick layer for a horizontal foliation orientation developed by an order 1 shear strain (Mainprice & Silver 1993). This estimated thickness,which depends on the 4 per cent anisotropy observed in continentalmantle xenoliths (Mainprice & Silver 1993), is compatible with theestimated thickness of APM-related anisotropy from Indian Oceansurface wave analyses (L´evˆeque
et al.
1998). The estimated 200 kmthick near-surface region of ﬂow contrasts with the
∼
600 km thick section of mantle that moved with the South American plate under southern Brazil (VanDecar
et al.
1995). Here, SKS fast polariza-tiondirectionsundertheParanaBasinalsoparallelSouthAmericanAPM (James & Assumpcao 1996), and delay times correspond toa
∼
100 km thick layer. If ﬂow is restricted to levels deeper thanthe cratonic root—about 250 km here (Grand 1994; VanDecar
et al.
1995)—then a 100 km thick layer could be accommodated abovethe 410 km discontinuity below which anisotropy is small (Meade
et al.
1995). Hence, in our study area and under southern Brazil,the anisotropy appears to arise in a foliated boundary layer betweenthe rigid plate and the asthenosphere. VanDecar
et al.
(1995) study
C

2002 RAS,
GJI
,
149,
F1–F7

Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.